Cuomo Celebrates Abortion Up Until Birth

[TCROW]

What I think about abortion and how I feel about it are two different things.

I would sort of distill this down to say there's the human response and the taxpayer response, I hope I'm not taking too much license with what you're trying to say here. Both very real and valid and permitted to be different.

I get where you're coming from.

 

[black dog]

Folks feelings dont make for good laws..

 

[This_person]

Its never impacted my life, Its none of anyone's business what medical choices a woman makes..

That makes sense. If her medical status is better off if she just rams people down on the street with her SUV, that's HER medical choice, and the other lives involved are not really to be considered.

Same thing - other people die for her choice, right?

 

[This_person]

Folks feelings dont make for good laws..

Like feeling a life she willingly put into her body is not really a life, even though every bit of science says different?

Like feeling killing another human being is a choice because there's a willingly-created dependency relationship?

What kind of "feelings" are you talking about?

 

[This_person]

I would sort of distill this down to say there's the human response and the taxpayer response, I hope I'm not taking too much license with what you're trying to say here. Both very real and valid and permitted to be different.

I get where you're coming from.

That negates the innocent life being taken. There's absolutely no difference between that life inside the womb and outside in terms of it being a distinct and separate human life from the mother. All of the talk of the costs of housing the child should it turn to crime later in life because it had a crappy mom/dad, or paying welfare to feed it, or whatever, are just as true if the kid is 8 as 8 months in the womb. If you're not ok with mom ordering someone to kill her 8 year old, and you think it's just fine that the law restricts that from happening, there's no good reason to be ok with her ordering someone to kill the child in the womb.

 

[TCROW]

That negates the innocent life being taken. There's absolutely no difference between that life inside the womb and outside in terms of it being a distinct and separate human life from the mother. All of the talk of the costs of housing the child should it turn to crime later in life because it had a crappy mom/dad, or paying welfare to feed it, or whatever, are just as true if the kid is 8 as 8 months in the womb. If you're not ok with mom ordering someone to kill her 8 year old, and you think it's just fine that the law restricts that from happening, there's no good reason to be ok with her ordering someone to kill the child in the womb.

I don't disagree in principle. Yes, it is a life, and I often find myself conflicted on this. As I've said, abortion is a very dark corner of our human experience. I don't agree with people who are pro-abortion who say, "It's not a life." or "It's not a human." It very clearly is life at any stage of gestation, as cells that can divide is the very definition of life. That life is inside a human, so it is very much a human life. That's a terrible logical argument to make.

All I'm saying is that I'd rather live in a country that stays out of this decision completely rather than one that inserts itself in the process. It doesn't make me feel good, but neither does asking my government to get involved in that process and prevent a pregnant from seeking an abortion if that is her choice. So either way, I'm left swallowing something I'd rather not. So in that case, I choose freedom and will live with the discomfort that might cause me personally with respect to destroying a life.

 

[GURPS]

So either way, I'm left swallowing something I'd rather not. So in that case, I choose freedom and will live with the discomfort that might cause me personally with respect to destroying a life.

Indeed ...


[this is not directed at you]

Just own it for what it is ... don't wrap it in euphemisms of choice or a clump of cells

especially in light of NY move .... YOU choose to Murder Your Unborn Child ... nothing less, nothing more ...

 

[This_person]

All I'm saying is that I'd rather live in a country that stays out of this decision completely rather than one that inserts itself in the process. It doesn't make me feel good, but neither does asking my government to get involved in that process and prevent a pregnant from seeking an abortion if that is her choice. So either way, I'm left swallowing something I'd rather not. So in that case, I choose freedom and will live with the discomfort that might cause me personally with respect to destroying a life.

What if that mother wanted to kill her two month old? Should we not ask the government to get involved in that process, if that is her choice? Where's the freedom for that two month old? Or, in the case of abortion, for that unborn baby? There is essentially no difference, based on your acceptance of the logic that the distinct human life in the womb is indeed a distinct human life.

If you're ok with the government getting involved with killing the two month old, why should the government not get involved with the unborn baby?

 

[vraiblonde]

Just own it for what it is ... don't wrap it in euphemisms of choice or a clump of cells

Thank you. Call it what it is and own it. This is how abortion became so acceptable in this country: calling it "choice" and "women's health" and whatever else they come up with. It's abortion. You are terminating a human life. Don't sugarcoat it to make it more palatable and water down the morality of it.

What they're saying is "abortion is bad so let's call it something else." Emotion based and manipulative. Why not just go with a practical argument: this woman cannot or will not care for a child at this point in her life; she can either abort it, or she can have it and make its life hell with abuse and neglect. Honestly, don't we all see these news stories about abused children and wonder why the hell the incubator didn't just have an abortion?

Abortion is not something that should be celebrated, ever. It should be treated as a sad consequence of making poor decisions.

And what happened to the partial-birth abortion ban that George Bush promised us? I know it was signed into law, but then challenged by some leftwing court, but I lost track of it from there. You have to wonder what kind of ghoulish psychopath came up with that procedure.

 

[vraiblonde]

What if that mother wanted to kill her two month old? Should we not ask the government to get involved in that process, if that is her choice? Where's the freedom for that two month old? Or, in the case of abortion, for that unborn baby? There is essentially no difference, based on your acceptance of the logic that the distinct human life in the womb is indeed a distinct human life.

If you're ok with the government getting involved with killing the two month old, why should the government not get involved with the unborn baby?

Offer a solution. "They should quit having irresponsible sex" isn't a good one because you can't enforce it.

So let's pretend abortion is outlawed right now. What happens? Paint me a picture.

 

[GURPS]

And what happened to the partial-birth abortion ban that George Bush promised us? I know it was signed into law, but then challenged by some leftwing court, but I lost track of it from there. You have to wonder what kind of ghoulish psychopath came up with that procedure.

well now FOR THE HEALTH OF THE MOTHER you get a lethal injection for the baby that dies over the next couple of days 'deliver' said dead baby at the clinic or your toilet if you cannot make it back in time .........


let that sink in DELIVER OR GIVE BIRTH TO THE DEAD INFANT For the HEALTH or Life of the Mother ... if a termination of the pregnancy is warranted ... why are you giving birth to the dead child

there should be some sort of Emergency C-Section Going on

 

[GURPS]

"They should quit having irresponsible sex" isn't a good one because you can't enforce it.

well that would be the correct course of action ... keep your skirt down, or your dick in your pants

 

[vraiblonde]

well that would be the correct course of action ... keep your skirt down, or your dick in your pants

But we agree that's not going to happen, right?

 

[This_person]

Offer a solution. "They should quit having irresponsible sex" isn't a good one because you can't enforce it.

So let's pretend abortion is outlawed right now. What happens? Paint me a picture.

Well, that WAS the case in most states until the 1970's. As far as I know, there was a lower rate of illegitimate children being born and a host of other things that implied more of a "I'm responsible for my actions" type of mentality in both men and women.

But, let's get to it.

At first, people who are used to getting abortions will moan and cry that their rights are being violated, but then they'll realize they might have to take care of kids if they have them. Many people will have kids they don't want, and those will fill up the backlog of adoption requests for babies that currently exists today, or, they will raise kids when they are entirely unfit or unprepared at least to do so.

A generation or so will have a slightly increased rate of needs for welfare, which will create a cry for welfare "reform" (which, to liberals means "give more money" and to conservatives means "check yourself before you wreck yourself"). But, most of those kids will realize their life sucked being raised by people who shouldn't raise kids, and they will likely not have kids, or, have kids in the form of a marriage, job, etc., etc. Some of those kids will be criminals, and will increase our prison problem, which will call for more justice reform (which to liberals will mean "make less criminal things criminal, or, if you leave them criminal reduce the punishment for doing bad stuff", and to conservatives will mean, "sucks to be you if you commit a crime - we're gonna make it worse for you to try and deter future crime").

What do you think will happen if mothers are no longer allowed to kill their kids?

 

[This_person]

But we agree that's not going to happen, right?

What was the rate of illegitimate kids prior to Roe?

 

[vraiblonde]

What was the rate of illegitimate kids prior to Roe?

Couldn't tell you and it doesn't matter anyway. This is here and now.

 

[This_person]

Couldn't tell you and it doesn't matter anyway. This is here and now.

Well, I've always been told "What's past is prologue."

I've also seen that people act how you treat them - which is why we're all ####ty to Salmon and Sappy and Transporter and MidnightSpanker, etc., etc. They're total pieces of crap in how they treat people, so we don't treat them well. AWPitt and I seem to disagree on a lot, but we respect each other's opinions and speak like adults with one another, not treating each other like crap. You and I agree on a heck of a lot, and disagree on a heck of a lot, and normally treat each other pretty darned well for the same reason.

So, if we treat people like they're responsible for their actions, and (outside of rape - statutory, incest, or otherwise) getting pregnant is a voluntary action, and the responsibilities of that action are lifelong and expensive and difficult (and rewarding in ways that negate all of that for most people), then they're likely to act like it.

 

[vraiblonde]

At first, people who are used to getting abortions will moan and cry that their rights are being violated, but then they'll realize they might have to take care of kids if they have them. Many people will have kids they don't want, and those will fill up the backlog of adoption requests for babies that currently exists today, or, they will raise kids when they are entirely unfit or unprepared at least to do so.

A generation or so will have a slightly increased rate of needs for welfare, which will create a cry for welfare "reform" (which, to liberals means "give more money" and to conservatives means "check yourself before you wreck yourself"). But, most of those kids will realize their life sucked being raised by people who shouldn't raise kids, and they will likely not have kids, or, have kids in the form of a marriage, job, etc., etc. Some of those kids will be criminals, and will increase our prison problem, which will call for more justice reform (which to liberals will mean "make less criminal things criminal, or, if you leave them criminal reduce the punishment for doing bad stuff", and to conservatives will mean, "sucks to be you if you commit a crime - we're gonna make it worse for you to try and deter future crime").

Thank you for your well thought out response.

That is indeed what will most likely happen. Are we as a society willing to wait it out? If it were up to me, I'd say yes. Goals and all. But I do not believe for one minute my fellow countrymen will be so patient, and the politicians will seize on it to campaign and get elected and proceed with their destruction of America.

One of my favorite political moments was when this girl told then-candidate for Governor Jesse Ventura that she was pregnant and the father had abandoned her and she had no education, and what as Governor was he going to do for her? He responded with, basically, "I didn't knock you up, you need to take care of your own damn self and be more responsible in the future." WELL! The prog media lost its hivemind and attacked the #### out of him. Minnesota elected him anyway, and the media proceeded to attack the #### out of him until he decided not to run for re-election in 2003.

"I feel your pain" resonates with us, even when we know the callous self-serving politician doesn't really mean it.

 

[This_person]

Thank you for your well thought out response.

That is indeed what will most likely happen. Are we as a society willing to wait it out? If it were up to me, I'd say yes. Goals and all. But I do not believe for one minute my fellow countrymen will be so patient, and the politicians will seize on it to campaign and get elected and proceed with their destruction of America.

One of my favorite political moments was when this girl told then-candidate for Governor Jesse Ventura that she was pregnant and the father had abandoned her and she had no education, and what as Governor was he going to do for her? He responded with, basically, "I didn't knock you up, you need to take care of your own damn self and be more responsible in the future." WELL! The prog media lost its hivemind and attacked the #### out of him. Minnesota elected him anyway, and the media proceeded to attack the #### out of him until he decided not to run for re-election in 2003.

"I feel your pain" resonates with us, even when we know the callous self-serving politician doesn't really mean it.

The key to your analogy to me is "Minnesota elected him anyway." I would not have used "anyway" there, because that answers your question as to whether your fellow countrymen will be so patient. We LONG for the response he gave to come from politicians. That's, clearly, Trump's strong suit. There's not an evangelical out there - which he won handily - that thinks Trump is a good guy. We don't want "good guys", we want people who will follow the Constitution. This is why I am against him using the "emergency" power; that seems a bit extra-constitutional to me because it's not "emergent", it's status quo. That doesn't mean "not bad", that means it is policy of the federal government, not an emergency.

But, I'm off the subject. Even if our fellow countrymen don't want to wait, too damned bad for them. We are supposed to be free, but not free to kill. Freedom does not imply one person can kill another with impunity, so abortion is not a freedom. If it means people's lives are demonstrably reduced in quality, that is their problem. The percentage of kids with crappy parents, raised in poverty, etc., that commit suicide may be higher than the norm (I really have no idea - I doubt it is higher, but I'm conceding the potential of the point), but I am quite certain it is far below 100%. What that tells me is that it is not the opinion of those killed children, on average, that their life is better by not existing. I do not think it is the mother's or the father's or the president's or the Congress' or the SCOTUS' job to decide those lives are better left unlived, especially when the people in the situation do not kill themselves at epidemic rates.

Just my opinion.

 

[mAlice]

I suspected as much

...however, since I'm not an OB/GYN, I couldn't know for sure without tons of research. So, here ya' go.